Geometric morphometrics reveals body shape differences between sympatric redfish <i>Sebastes mentella, Sebastes fasdatus</i> and their hybrids in the Gulf of St Lawrence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Significant body shape differences were observed between two commercially important redfish species Sebastes fasdatus and Sebastes mentella , in the Gulf of St Lawrence, first classified according to the variability at the MDH‐A* locus, a diagnostic criterion for the two species in allopatry. The observed sexual dimorphism was probably related to the presence of gravid females in the sample. Sebastes mentella appeared to be more fusiform than S. fasdatus , a characteristic that may reflect the more pelagic behaviour of S. mentella . The body shape of their hybrids was closer to that of S. mentella . Similarities between hybrids and S. mentella were also observed for meristic characteristics and depth distribution. The implications of these similarities for introgression are discussed. Body shape variability of specimens of hybrid origin was greater than that of either parental species, with features ranging from S. mentella‐like to S. fasciatus ‐like. The role of introgression in generating morphological variability is emphasized.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".